Hi Steve!

As for the engineering "goo" (btw, I like that word!  Can I use it?),
here are a few thoughts:

1. For email that is related to a project that has some substantive
content, why isn't that managed as part of the project file?  I
understand the issue of an email's value not always being evident upon
receipt, however if it supports a task, no matter if it is called upon
later for reference, doesn't remove it's value as evidence of the task.

2. If you don't want to go that way, you may choose to use your Business
Value designation, which would give the recipient 1 year to decide if
it's valuable or not.  However, engineering projects can last for many
years, so perhaps that isn't long enough? (sorry - outside of my
expertise!).

3. As for the issue of reference/km, I assume there is some way others
in your organization are allowed to maintain this type of content.
Where do you store the listserv messages that you keep as reference?
Where do you keep interesting articles, ARMA Infopro, etc. that you feel
will have ongoing referential value?  Can't engineering do the same?

As a general rule, I think that an annual review would be at least
necessary, but perhaps a semi-annual review may ferret more of the wheat
from the chaff, and not necessarily overwhelm the user.  I guess it
depends on the volume you're dealing with.  If a typical engineer has,
at the end of one year, 2GB of "goo" email, then reviewing more
frequently is probably in order.

As for the issue of you not understanding how they work, it may actually
be that they don't understand how they work either.  I have found that
if you can challenge them to really evaluate their needs and contrast
that with their practices, you'll find that there is a balancing point
where everyone's needs can be *mostly* met.  ;)

Good luck!

Julie

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance